<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1982 (10) TMI 201 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153884</link>
    <description>Part-payment of tax with quarterly returns under the Gujarat Sales Tax Act was treated as a default in timely payment, not as a failure to pay the whole amount required by the return-payment mechanism. Section 45(5) therefore applied to non-payment within the prescribed time, subject to reasonable cause, whereas section 45(6) was confined to cases where the full tax or extra tax required under section 47 was not paid or where reassessment created a specified excess. The Court followed the earlier pari materia construction under the Bombay Sales Tax Act and declined to reopen the coordinate Bench view on stare decisis. The penalty was accordingly referable to section 45(5), not section 45(6).</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 04 Oct 1982 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 01 Aug 2013 14:21:56 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=170918" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1982 (10) TMI 201 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153884</link>
      <description>Part-payment of tax with quarterly returns under the Gujarat Sales Tax Act was treated as a default in timely payment, not as a failure to pay the whole amount required by the return-payment mechanism. Section 45(5) therefore applied to non-payment within the prescribed time, subject to reasonable cause, whereas section 45(6) was confined to cases where the full tax or extra tax required under section 47 was not paid or where reassessment created a specified excess. The Court followed the earlier pari materia construction under the Bombay Sales Tax Act and declined to reopen the coordinate Bench view on stare decisis. The penalty was accordingly referable to section 45(5), not section 45(6).</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 04 Oct 1982 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153884</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>